It’s the political rhetoric on both sides of that are driving people to extreme actions. The news is just feeding everyone’s fears and social media is helping.
Just look at Reddit and Lemmy celebrating the death of a person. Mainly due to his political views. I keep seeing people post what he stated about the 2nd amendment and some deaths will occur. Even after this incident, I would wager he still believes in 2nd amendment.
The person committing the act of violence with an instrument (gun, knife, etc) is the problem. You don’t blame a drunk drivers vehicle for the deadly accident. You blame the person who was irresponsible and knowingly committed a crime.
I am just curious, what exactly were these political views? And why do you think they are legitimate and not demagoguery?
The reason I am asking is that while living in the US, the impression I got is that most polemicists were demagogues. It was a method to get money, grifting so to speak.
This was a while ago, but I vividly remember several nominally anti-abortion politicians getting caught getting their mistresses pregnant and then pressuring the mistresses to get an abortion.
Gun control is an issue you could reasonably go on either side on, but “it’s fine if we have a mass shooting every week if it means we get to keep our guns” is not. Neither is, you know, all the other fascist shit he was spouting.
Any extreme political rhetoric you’ve noticed on the left is a direct consequence and in reaction to extreme political actions undertaken by the right.
Fuck around and find out. It’s really easy to just not fuck around and spread hate and violence everywhere you go, believe it or not. Kirk got what he wanted and worked towards inflicting on others.
It’s the political rhetoric on both sides of that are driving people to extreme actions. The news is just feeding everyone’s fears and social media is helping.
Just look at Reddit and Lemmy celebrating the death of a person. Mainly due to his political views. I keep seeing people post what he stated about the 2nd amendment and some deaths will occur. Even after this incident, I would wager he still believes in 2nd amendment.
The person committing the act of violence with an instrument (gun, knife, etc) is the problem. You don’t blame a drunk drivers vehicle for the deadly accident. You blame the person who was irresponsible and knowingly committed a crime.
A vehicle’s main purpose is transportation. It has to be misused or weaponized to kill.
A gun’s purpose is to kill. If you pull the trigger, whether you want it or not, you are firing a bullet designed to be as lethal as possible.
So yes, I blame guns.
I am just curious, what exactly were these political views? And why do you think they are legitimate and not demagoguery?
The reason I am asking is that while living in the US, the impression I got is that most polemicists were demagogues. It was a method to get money, grifting so to speak.
This was a while ago, but I vividly remember several nominally anti-abortion politicians getting caught getting their mistresses pregnant and then pressuring the mistresses to get an abortion.
Gun control is an issue you could reasonably go on either side on, but “it’s fine if we have a mass shooting every week if it means we get to keep our guns” is not. Neither is, you know, all the other fascist shit he was spouting.
Any extreme political rhetoric you’ve noticed on the left is a direct consequence and in reaction to extreme political actions undertaken by the right.
Fuck around and find out. It’s really easy to just not fuck around and spread hate and violence everywhere you go, believe it or not. Kirk got what he wanted and worked towards inflicting on others.